XXX-3, -4, and -5 feel somewhat disconnected from the rest of the SCP.

The citizen's handbook section could do with some better formatting, to break up the wall of text. Putting the entire thing in a quote box, adding some line breaks, and putting the rules in an actual wikidot list would make it a lot more readable.

SCP-XXX-1 is currently at coordinates [REDACTED] in the Pine Barrens of New Jersey.

In general, you don't redact things in the procedures. In this case, it feels redundant since you have highlighted the region it is located (practically destroying the secrecy of the area). You're better off building a Site around it.

SCP-XXX is a small town, with working shops, and a small population, all are contained in a pocket dimension.

To make things clearer, I suggest this "SCP-XXX is a town located in a pocket dimension, accessible via…"

An improvement would be to state rough numbers of the population.

I don't think you need to explicitly highlight "working shops" since towns would typically include outlets where small-scale businesses are conducted.

Citizens are not inherently hostile, and are usually friendly towards outsiders, as well as willing to cooperate with Foundation personnel. The police of the town, unlike the citizens, react with hostility towards outsiders, and will follow any visitors, as well as bar them from entering most buildings.

The contrast here makes little sense. The police clearly will attempt to clamp down on outsiders, which might make townsmen uneasy and halt their way of life. Therefore, it is unlike that regular townsmen will treat outsiders too nicely, if it invites attention from law enforcement.

foundation

Capitalise "Foundation". It is used as a proper noun, referring to the group called the Foundation.

SCP-XXX-4 is the collective designation for two objects who acted in perfect cohesion, one always moving at very fast speeds when the other stopped.

If they act in "cohesion", how would one moving and the other immobile be that? I am assuming that the imagery is that the two bodies are synchronised and in a hive mind. The latter clause is probable, with or without the hive mind aspect to it.

Addendum 1, Citizen handbook

For the handbook contents, I think you can use the quote box to indicate that the passage is the guideline. As it is, it may come off as part of the SCP report (as written by the Foundation) instead of an external source attached to the report.

Okay, this is a town governed by a mad scientist via a dictatorship format who makes generic monsters for a hobby. There are many problematic parts, which I will elaborate.

I don't see how the Mayor would be an SCP. He made the "monsters", but there is nothing to indicate that he is not human or abnormal for a human. Consider this, for SCPs that are made by a human, do we generally write that the creator of those SCPs as a sub-designation as well? The answer to that would be no, in many cases.

It seems that the Mayor has almost complete control over the populace, which brings a lot of doubt about how can the Foundation explore the area. He might realise that the Foundation is troublesome and have policemen guarding the dimensional entry point and detaining Foundation personnel. Or tell them to not bother about other dimensions' way of life.

You went with the generic route of weaponising monsters, which is seen many times in this site and in media in general. But consider how realistic would it be to weaponise sentient things and get them to work for you. There is a reason why most modern weaponry are non-sentient things and not living.

Lastly, there is the portrayal of the townsman. It feels more like a poorly-made caricature of a person living in a totalitarian regime, mouthing off propaganda as though he were programmed to speak them. And the interview shed nothing new on the topic at hand; it just asserted that the Mayor is evil for using someone's daughter for experiments.

As it is, the examples of monsters have arbitrary "powers" that feel liek they are conceived randomly and not thinking for the overall story. As in, one can replace the abilities of any instance with any superpower and the story can stay the same.

Overall, the article runs along many common themes. It is not to say that they cannot work, but the overall is not interesting for reading. There are several ways you can go about this. Focus on the mayor? Or show the eeriness of townsmen openly accepting experimentation? Or that experimental is a social norm in that dimension? Or show why are "living weapons" made and what are they fighting against that necessitates these traits?

Re: Foreston NJ, a city where we totally don't experiment on our people

(account deleted)03 May 2016 13:31

The interview is what I'm having the most trouble with, it seems like the two route options, 1) People don't kiwi what's going on 2) Do and are ok with it
Both have people who tell me to avoid one, so I'm honestly not sure exactly what route I should take.

About the interview, think what kind of implication you want readers to realise after reading it (that is not done in the rest of the article and makes sense to be an interview).

But problems lie beyond the interview. The article shows many monsters made by this mayor, and yet you choose to conveniently focus on one particular monster via a conveniently placed interview in a plot twist reminiscent of a Hong Kong drama (where coincidences and people knowing one another coming together). You know the scope is wider by one monster and the person she was once; the scope goes out to the entire town.